View Single Post

jayjay, I hear you, that's why I formulated my initial statement as an opinion (I think) rather than a fact - I didn't categorically say that it can't be done over a prolonged period of time but I have serious doubts it can be done..

I respect that, but the fact is there are people who do it, not many at all, but there - so it can be done, but not by average joe.

Quote:

The starting premise is that you're trying to find value pre-match betting in, say, a sport like tennis where the favourites are usually extremely low on the odds.

Well I don't agree with that at all, so we are immediately on a different page. The way I used to work was in particular keying in on favs in and around the 8/11-1/3 mark that I believed to be better chances than the prices they were given, and there are plenty of those around over the course of a season. Plenty.

Quote:

The fastest way of securing profit from this type of betting is by picking winners consistently.

That goes without saying, and the way I used to work I always had a target of 65-70% over a course of a season which provided me with a modest living. The money I was earning was not spectacular, just an average life, with the main benefits being I watched sport for a living and could be as lazy as I wanted.

Quote:

If you follow a strategy of picking, say, all favourites you might end up getting a 10%-20% increase of your bank throughout the course of a season; which is hardly a profit you can use as a regular income.

Here again we are off in completely different directions to begin with - why are you insistent on seeing picking favs or picking dogs as a strategy? This is no strategy.

A professional will at times find a 1/5 shot that he/she is more than happy to be back and at others a 5/2 shot. There is no such strategy as "pick favs and you'll win", or "pick dogs and you'll win".

No. Sometimes you will find that over used term "value" in a fav and sometimes in a dog. It depends match to match, there is no pre-determined action.

Quote:

Then the issue of discipline could play an enormous part - what happens when you have a period of "drought" where picking favourites is simply not cost-effective - and you end up losing money? ( a period we're witnessing since the French Open and which is continuing until now ). What happens if that period lasts for months and months? How do you maintain your discipline waiting for the better days that will inevitably come?

These are the tests of a professional gambler. Any gambler no matter how good or bad will have had runs of wins and losses. An average everyday gambler will chase his losses and find himself in more trouble sooner or later, and a professional will put faith in their capping ability and know that the tables will turn (if the capper has proven over time he can make consistent profit, he will know it will be ok in the end).

How you maintain your discipline? By having a set of rules and following them religiously, once you break out of that you expose yourself to some severe danger. I was guilty of this and got away with it a few times on the bounce, that developed complacency and recklessness and I went to the well one too many times.

I crossed the line from professional gambler to gambling professional.

A professional gambler uses the industry as a means to an end.

A gambling professional becomes more concerned with gambling frequently rather than picking and choosing their spots.

Quote:

Who would have thought that Fish would beat Federer or that Henin would lose to Bartoli for example? I don't think even 1% of bettors could have predicted these results prior to the event, hence my statement that either strategy is unsuccesful.

Yeah but your "strategy" is completely flawed because only a fool would say to themselves that they either only back favs or only back dogs. It's really got nothing to do with that.

In relation to the matches you bring up, yes I agree, results like that which no one or very few will pick do come about. I'd have easily told you Federer and Henin would have won those matches BUT that doesn't mean I would have backed either of them at their prices.

As a professional I would rarely, if ever, touch anything below 1/5.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ryan23

Jay just out of interest is their 1 sport that statistically pro gamblers do much better in? or should isay is their 1 sport that a lot of them would say yep that sport is the best for making money...?

Not as far as I'm aware but I'm sure everyone will give you their theory on it and claim one sport is better than the next. I mix with alot of horse racing professionals and they often find it hard to grasp the fact that a team at EVS is a good bet as opposed to the 4's and 5's they are getting on favs they are backing. However, what they must consider is that if I'm betting on EVS on a tennis match there are only two outcomes possible. They may be getting better prices, but conversly, they are also betting against a far greater amount of possible outcomes.

If there is one area of gambling that bookmakers are afraid of, it's niche markets. Not your win-lose-draw market, but specified markets such as time of goals, bookings, corners etc. As these type of markets are purely numbers based and professionals can find an edge in it before a compiler can, it just depends who is best at it. Who spots the trends first and on what basis does the pro or bookie believe the trends will continue or cease.

And niche markets for any sport as bookies generally are ok with their prices on major sports on a win/lose/draw level, but with the newer markets there is scope for them to be burned - but not by the public at large of course, the public at large will always lose to the bookie in the long run, always.